Google Is AI, Folks

October 24, 2024

Google’s legal team is certainly creative. In the face of the Justice Department’s push to break up the monopoly, reports Yahoo Finance, “Google’s New Antitrust Defense is AI.” Wait, what? Reporter Hamza Shaban points to a blog post by Google VP Lee-Anne Mulholland, writing:

“In Google’s view, the government’s heavy-handed approach to transforming the search market ignores the nascent developments in AI, the fresh competition in the space, and new modes of seeking information online, like AI-powered answer engines. The energy around AI and the potential disruption of how users interact with search is, competitively speaking, a negative for Google, said Wedbush analyst Dan Ives. But in another way, as a defense against antitrust charges, it’s a positive. ‘That’s an argument against monopoly that bodes well for Google,’ he said.”

Really? Some believe quite the opposite. We learn:

“‘The DOJ has specifically noted that this evolution in technology is precisely why they are intervening at this point in time,’ said Gil Luria, an analyst at DA Davidson. ‘They want to make sure that Google is not able to convert the monopoly it currently has in Search into a monopoly in AI Enhanced Search.’”

Exactly. Google is clearly a monopoly. We think their assertion means, "treat us special because we are special." This church-lady thinking may or may not work. We live in an interesting judicial moment.

Cynthia Murrell, October 24, 2024

Can Prabhakar Do the Black Widow Thing to Technology at Google?

October 21, 2024

dino orange_thumb_thumbNo smart software but we may use image generators to add some modern spice to the dinobaby’s output.

The reliable (mostly?) Wall Street Journal ran a story titled“Google Executive Overseeing Search and Advertising Leaves Role.” The executive in question is Prabhakar Raghavan, the other half of the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Team. The wizardly Prabhakar is the person Edward Zitron described as “The Man Who Killed Google Search.” I recommend reading that essay because it has more zip than the Murdoch approach to poohbah analysis.

I want to raise a question because I assume that Mr. Zitron is largely correct about the demise of Google Search. The sleek Prabhakar accelerated the decline. He was the agent of the McKinsey think infused in his comedy partner Sundar. The two still get laughs at their high school reunions amidst chums and more when classmates gather to explain their success to one another.

The Google approach: Who needs relevance? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Not quite excellent.

What is the question? Here it is:

Will Prabhakar do to Google’s technology what he did to search?

My view is that Google’s technology has demonstrated corporate ossification. The company “invented”, according to Google lore, the transformer. Then Google — because it was concerned about its invention — released some of it as open source and then watched as Microsoft marketed AI as the next big thing for the Softies. And what was the outfit making Microsoft’s marketing coup possible? It was Sam AI-Man.

Microsoft, however, has not been a technology leader for how many years?

Suddenly the Google announced a crisis and put everyone on making Google the leader in AI. I assume the McKinsey think did not give much thought to the idea that MSFT’s transformer would be used to make Google look darned silly. In fact, it was Prabhakar who stole the attention of the pundits with a laughable AI demonstration in Paris.

Flash forward from early 2023 to late 2024 what’s Google doing with technology? My perception is that Google is trying to create AI winners, capture the corporate market from Microsoft, and convince as many people as possible that if Google is broken apart, AI in America will flop.

Yes, the fate of the nation hangs on Google’s remaining a monopoly. That sounds like a punch line to a skit in the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Show.

Here’s my hypothesis: The death of search (the Edward Zitron view) is a job well done. The curtains fall on Act I of the Google drama. Act II is about the Google technology. The idea is that the technology of the online advertising monopoly defines the future of America.

Stay tuned because the story will be streamed on YouTube with advertising, lots of advertising, of course.

Stephen E Arnold, October 21, 2024

AI Podcasters Are Reviewing Books Now

October 10, 2024

I read an article about how students are using AI to cheat on homework and receive book summaries. Students especially favor AI voices reading to them. I wasn’t surprised by that, because this generation is more visual and audial than others. What astounded me, however, was that AI is doing more than I expected such as reading and reviewing books according to ArsTechnica: “Fake AI “Podcasters” Are Reviewing My Book And It’s Freaking Me Out.”

Kyle Orland has followed generative AI for a while. He also recently wrote a book about Minesweeper. He was as astounded as me when we heard to AI generated podcasters discussing his book into a 12.5 minute distilled show. The chatbots were “engaging and endearing.” They were automated by Google’s new NotebookLM, a virtual research assistant that can summarize, explain complex ideas, and brainstorm from selected sources. Google recently added the Audio Overview feature to turn documents into audio discussions.

Orland fed his 30,000 word Minesweeper book into NotebookLM and he was amazed that it spat out a podcast similar to NPR’s Pop Culture Happy Hour. It did get include errors but as long as it wasn’t being used for serious research, Orland was cool with it:

“Small, overzealous errors like these—and a few key bits of the book left out of the podcast entirely—would give me pause if I were trying to use a NotebookLM summary as the basis for a scholarly article or piece of journalism. But I could see using a summary like this to get some quick Cliff’s Notes-style grounding on a thick tome I didn’t have the time or inclination to read fully. And, unlike poring through Cliff’s Notes, the pithy, podcast-style format would actually make for enjoyable background noise while out on a walk or running errands.”

Orland thinks generative AI chatbot podcasts will be an enjoyable and viable entertainment option in the future. They probably will. There’s actually a lot of creative ways creators could use AI chatbots to generate content from their own imaginations. It’s worrisome but also gets the creative juices flowing.

Whitney Grace October 10, 2024

Why Present Bad Sites?

October 7, 2024

dino 10 19_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis blog post did not require the use of smart software, just a dumb humanoid.

I read “Google Search Is Testing Blue Checkmark Feature That Helps Users Spot Genuine Websites.” I know this is a test, but I have a question: What’s genuine mean to Google and its smart software? I know that Google cannot answer this question without resorting to consulting nonsensicalness, but “genuine” is a word. I just don’t know what’s genuine to Google. Is a Web site that uses SEO trickery to appear in a results list? Is it a blog post written by a duplicitous PR person working at a large Google-type firm? Is it a PDF appearing on a “genuine” government’s Web site?

image

A programmer thinking about blue check marks. The obvious conclusion is to provide a free blue check mark. Then later one can charge for that sign of goodness. Thanks, Microsoft. Good enough. Just like that big Windows update. Good enough.

The write up reports:

Blue checkmarks have appeared next to certain websites on Google Search for some users. According to a report from The Verge, this is because Google is experimenting with a verification feature to let users know that sites aren’t fraudulent or scams.

Okay, what’s “fraudulent” and what’s a “scam”?

What does Google say? According to the write up:

A Google spokesperson confirmed the experiment, telling Mashable, “We regularly experiment with features that help shoppers identify trustworthy businesses online, and we are currently running a small experiment showing checkmarks next to certain businesses on Google.”

A couple of observations:

  1. Why not allow the user to NOT out these sites? Better yet, give the user a choice of seeing de-junked or fully junked sites? Wow, that’s too hard. Imagine. A Boolean operator.
  2. Why does Google bother to index these sites? Why not change the block list for the crawl? Wow, that’s too much work. Imagine a Googler editing a “do not crawl” list manually.
  3. Is Google admitting that it can identify problematic sites like those which push fake medications or the stolen software videos on YouTube? That’s pretty useful information for an attorney taking legal action against Google, isn’t it?

Net net: Google is unregulated and spouts baloney. Google needs to jack up its revenue. It has fines to pay and AI wizards to pay. Tough work.

Stephen E Arnold, October 7, 2024

Google Rear Ends Microsoft on an EU Information Highway

September 25, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[2]_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

A couple of high-technology dinosaurs with big teeth and even bigger wallets are squabbling in a rather clever way. If the dispute escalates some of the smaller vehicles on the EU’s Information Superhighway are going to be affected by a remarkable collision. The orange newspaper published “Google Files Brussels Complaint against Microsoft Cloud Business.” On the surface, the story explains that “Google accuses Microsoft of locking customers into its Azure services, preventing them from easily switching to alternatives.”

image

Two very large and easily provoked dinosaurs are engaged in a contest in a court of law. Which will prevail, or will both end up with broken arms? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. I think you are the prettier dinosaur.

To put some bite into the allegation, Google aka Googzilla has:

filed an antitrust complaint in Brussels against Microsoft, alleging its Big Tech rival engages in unfair cloud computing practices that has led to a reduction in choice and an increase in prices… Google said Microsoft is “exploiting” its customers’ reliance on products such as its Windows software by imposing “steep penalties” on using rival cloud providers.

From my vantage point this looks like a rear ender; that is, Google — itself under considerable scrutiny by assorted governmental entities — has smacked into Microsoft, a veteran of EU regulatory penalties. Google explained to the monopoly officer that Microsoft was using discriminatory practices to prevent Google, AWS, and Alibaba from closing cloud computing deals.

In a conversation with some of my research team, several observations surfaced from what I would describe as a jaded group. Let me share several of these:

  1. Locking up business is precisely the “game” for US high-technology dinosaurs with big teeth and some China-affiliated outfit too. I believe the jargon for this business tactic is “lock in.” IBM allegedly found the play helpful when mainframes were the next big thing. Just try and move some government agencies or large financial institutions from their Big Iron to Chromebooks and see how the suggestion is greeted.,
  2. Google has called attention to the alleged illegal actions of Microsoft, bringing the Softies into the EU litigation gladiatorial arena.
  3. Information provided by Google may illustrate the alleged business practices so that when compared to the Google’s approach, Googzilla looks like the ideal golfing partner.
  4. Any question that US outfits like Google and Microsoft are just mom-and-pop businesses is definitively resolved.

My personal opinion is that Google wants to make certain that Microsoft is dragged into what will be expensive, slow, and probably business trajectory altering legal processes. Perhaps Satya and Sundar will testify as their mercenaries explain that both companies are not monopolies, not hindering competition, and love whales, small start ups, ethical behavior, and the rule of law.

Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2024

YouTube Is Bringing More AI To Its Platform

September 20, 2024

AI-generated videos have already swarmed on YouTube. These videos range from fake Disney movie trailers to inappropriate content that missed being flagged. YouTube creators are already upset that their videos are being overlooked by the algorithm, but some are being hired for an AI project. Digital Trends explains more: “More AI May Be Coming To YouTube In A Big Way.”

Gemini AI is currently in beta testing across YouTube. Gemini AI is described as a tool for YouTubers to brainstorm video ideas, including titles, topics, and thumbnails. Only a select few YouTubers are testing Gemini AI and will share their feedback. The AI tool will eventually be located underneath the platform’s analytic menu, under the research tab. The tool could actually be helpful:

“This marks Google’s second foray into including AI assistance in YouTube users’ creative processes. In May, the company launched a content inspiration tool on YouTube Studio that provides tips and suggestions for future clip topics based on viewer trends. For most any given topic, the AI will highlight related videos you’ve already published, provide tips on themes to use, and generate a script outline for you to follow.”

The YouTubers are experimenting with both Gemini AI and the content inspiration tool. They’re doing A/B testing and their experiences will shape how AI is used on the video platform. YouTube does acknowledge that AI is a transformative creative tool, but viewers want to know if what they’re watching is real or fake. Is anyone imagining a AI warning or rating system?

Whitney Grace, September 20, 2024

Great Moments in Leadership: Drive an Uber

September 18, 2024

I was zipping through my newsfeed and spotted this item: “Ex-Sony Boss Tells Laid-Off Employees to Drive an Uber and Find a Cheap Place to Live.” In the article, the ex-Sony boss is quoted as allegedly saying:

I think it’s probably very painful for the managers, but I don’t think that having skill in this area is going to be a lifetime of poverty or limitation. It’s still where the action is, and it’s like the pandemic but now you’re going to have to take a few…figure out how to get through it, drive an Uber or whatever, go off to find a cheap place to live and go to the beach for a year.

I admit that I find the advice reasonably practical. However, it costs money to summon an Uber. The other titbit is that a person without a job should find a “cheap place to live.” Ah, ha, van life or moving in with a friend. Possibly one could become a homeless person dwelling near a beach. What if the terminated individual has a family? I suppose there are community food services.

From an employee’s point of view, this is “tough love” management. How effective is this approach? I have worked for a number of firms in my 50 plus year career prior to my retiring in 2013. I can honestly say that this Uber and move to a cheaper place to live is remarkable. It is novel. Possibly a breakthrough in management methods.

I look forward to a TED talk from this leader. When will the Harvard Business Review present a more in-depth look at the former Sony president’s ideas? Oh, right. “Former” is the operative word. Yep, former.

Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2024

A Moment to Remember: Google Explains Its Competitive Posture

September 16, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

What happens when those with insight into the Google talk in a bar to friends? Answer: Complete indifference. Question: What happens when a former Google employee’s comments are captured in a form which can be discovered by the prosecution in a trial? Answer: A peak inside Googzilla’s kimono.

image

An observer is horrified by the site revealed when an ex-Google professional talks about what’s inside the Googzilla kimono. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.

Ex-Google Exec Said Goal Was to Crush Competition, Trial Evidence Shows” reports that Google wanted to “crush” the competition. Google wanted a “monopoly.” Here’s what the Reuters’ article reports via its “trust” filter:

“We’ll be able to crush the other networks and that’s our goal,” David Rosenblatt, Google’s former president of display advertising, said of the company’s strategy in late 2008 or early 2009, according to notes shown in court…. “We’re both Goldman and NYSE,” he said, he said, according to the notes, referring to one of the world’s biggest stock exchanges at the time and one of its biggest market makers. “Google has created what’s comparable to the NYSE or London Stock Exchange; in other words, we’ll do to display what Google did to search,” Rosenblatt said.

On the surface, Mr. Rosenblatt is articulating what some folks have been asserting for years. Several observations:

  1. Google has been running free for a long time. Why?
  2. If true, the statement makes the outcome of EU litigation almost certain. Google will have to pay and change in ways which may be resisted by the nation-state of Google
  3. The comment reflects the machismo of the high tech US company and its hubris. Pride and vanity are believed by some to be a fundamental sin.

So what?

  1. Deconstructing what Google has built over the years may be quite difficult, maybe impossible. Well, that ends one line of retribution.
  2. If one breaks up Google and severs advertising, who can afford to buy it. Maybe the US should punt and nationalize the outfit. Why not let GSA run it? That would be exciting in my opinion.
  3. Google apologizes and keeps on doing what it has been doing for the last 25 years by filing appeals,  lobbying, and waiting out government lawyers who often come and go as Google says, “I was neither / Living nor dead, and I knew nothing.”

Net net: The Google is gonna Google no matter what.

Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2024

The UK Says, “Okay, Google, Get Out Your Checkbook”

September 13, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

I read “British Competition Regulator Objects to Google’s Ad Tech Practices.” The UK is expressing some direct discontent with the Google. The country is making clear that it is not thrilled with the “let ‘em do what they want, pardner” approach of US regulatory agencies. Not surprisingly, like the Netherlands, the government officials are putting the pedal to the metal. The write up reports:

In a statement, the Competition and Markets Authority alleged that the U.S. internet search titan “has harmed competition by using its dominance in online display advertising to favor its own ad tech services.”

I suppose to some the assertion that Google favors itself is not exactly a surprise. The write up continues:

Dan Taylor, Google’s vice president of Google Ads, said that the company disagreed with the CMA’s view and “will respond accordingly.” “Our advertising technology tools help websites and apps fund their content, and enable businesses of all sizes to effectively reach new customers,” Taylor said in an emailed statement. “Google remains committed to creating value for our publisher and advertiser partners in this highly competitive sector. The core of this case rests on flawed interpretations of the ad tech sector.”

image

Good enough illustration, MSFT Copilot.

The explanation from a Googler sounds familiar. Will the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority be convinced? My hunch is that the CMA will not be satisfied with Google’s posture on this hard metal chair. (Does that chair have electrodes attached to its frame and arm rests?)

The write up offers this statement:

In the CMA’s decision Friday, the watchdog said that, since 2015, Google has abused its dominant position as the operator of both ad buying tools “Google Ads” and “DV360,” and of a publisher ad server known as “DoubleClick For Publishers,” in order to strengthen the market position of its advertising exchange, AdX.

Oh, not quite a decade.

Why are European entities ramping up their legal actions? My opinions are:

  1. Google can produce cash. Ka-ching.
  2. The recent ruling that Google is a monopoly is essentially interpreted as a green light for other nation states to give the Google a go.
  3. Non-US regulators are fed up with Google’s largely unchecked behavior and have mustered up courage to try and stop a rolling underground car by standing in front of the massive conveyance and pushing with their bare hands to stop the momentum. (Good luck, folks.)

Net net: More Google pushback may be needed once the bold defiers of mass time velocity are pushed aside.

Stephen E Arnold, September 13, 2024

Brin Is Back and Working Every Day at Google: Will He Be Summoned to Appear and Testify?

September 11, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

I read some “real” news in the article “Sergey Brin Says He’s Working on AI at Google Pretty Much Every Day.” The write up does not provide specifics of his employment agreement, but the headline say “every day.” Does this mean that those dragging the Google into court will add him to their witness list? I am not an attorney, but I would be interested in finding out about the mechanisms for the alleged monopolistic lock in in the Google advertising system. Oh, well. I am equally intrigued to know if Mr. Brin will wear his roller blades to big meetings as he did with Viacom’s Big Dog.

My question is, “Can Mr. Brin go home again?” As Thomas Wolfe noted in his novel You Can’t Go Home Again”:

Every corner of our home has a story to tell.

image

I wonder if those dragging Alphabet Google YouTube into court will want to dig into that “story”?

Now what does the “real” news report other than Mr. Brin’s working every day? These items jumped off my screen and into my dinobaby mind:

  1. AI has tremendous value to humanity. I am not sure what this means when VCs, users, and assorted poohbahs point out that AI is burning cash, not generating it.
  2. AI is big and fast moving. Okay, but since the Microsoft AI marketing play with OpenAI, the flurry of activity has not translated to rapid fire next big things. In fact, progress on consumer-facing AI services has stalled. Even Google is reluctant to glue pizza to a crust if you know what I mean.
  3. The algorithms are demanding more “compute.” I think this means power, CPUs, and data. But Google is buying carbon credits, you say. Yeah, those are useful for PR, not for providing what Mr. Brin seems to suggest are needed to do AI.

Several thoughts crossed my mind:

First, most of the algorithms for smart software were presented in patent document form by Banjo, a Softbank company that ran into some headwinds. But the algorithms and numerical recipes were known and explained in Banjo’s patent documents. The missing piece was Google’s “transformer” method, which the company released as open source. Well, so what? The reason that large language models are becoming the same old same old. The Big Dogs of AI are using the same plumbing. Not much is new other than the hyperbole, right?

Second, where does Mr. Brin fit into the Google leadership set up. I am not sure he is in the cast of the Sundar & Prabhakar Comedy Show. What happens when he makes a suggestion? Who “approves” something he puts “wood” behind? Does his presence deliver entropy or chaos? Does he exist on the boundary, working his magic as he did with the Clever technology developed at IBM Almaden?

Third, how quickly will his working “pretty much every day” move him onto witness lists? Perhaps he will be asked to contribute to EU, US House, and US Senate hearings? How will Google work out the lingo of one of the original Googlers and the current “leadership”? The answer is meetings, scripting, and practicing. Aren’t these the things that motivated Mr. Brin to leave the company to pursue other interests. Now he wants

To sum up, just when I thought Google had reached peak dysfunction, I was wrong again.

Stephen E Arnold, September 11, 2024

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta